The tie that saved Rome. Do Western nations need a State Religion?

[Greatest I am]

Thanks all.

Seems that most are happy having immoral homophobic and misogynous religions corrupting the morals of our citizens.

Regards
DL

Are you talking about kristianity?

I am talking about all the mainstream religions that preach homophobia and misogyny as well as other immoral tenets.

That would include both Christianity and Islam.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

We've already got a state religion in our nation thanks.

Quite a strange one in the sense that the head of the church, the Queen, if not a Queen, would not be allowed by that misogynous church to be it's head.

Was it just last year that they finally allowed female Bishops?

Regards
DL

[Hobbes' Choice]

The tie that saved Rome. Do Western nations need a State Religion?

The Western nations of today, like Rome in the days of Constantine, are being fractured by the plethora of religious and racial factions the emigration is causing. The Western nations are again being inundated by various religious militias and no go zones set up by religious and racial factions.

All countries and large coalitions of countries need something to unite the populations and have it all move in the same direction when required. Religion is a good tool for uniting a country.

Constantine was looking for stability and peace for Rome and decided that a State Religion was the way to unify Rome and its allies. He chose the least barbaric and belligerent religion in his day, Christianity, to be the tie that would bind the empire and other countries together.

I see the Western religious forces of today doing the same as in Constantine’s day, fracturing the country and being an enemy to unity and peace.

A house divided cannot stand, --- and history is repeating itself.

To insure the survival of the Western ideology, in these times of religious strife and division, should the present Western political powers follow Constantine’s example and choose a State Religion?

I am not suggesting that we send out this new religion to convert by the sword the way Christianity did. I think that we are intelligent enough today to debate the morality of the various religions to determine which is the most moral and the best for nations and the individuals within them.

Constantine chose strength by numbers and not by ideology and I think we are mature enough today to choose by worthy morality and ideology.

Is creating a State Religion the way to peace?

Regards
DL

There is a vast body of knowledge that refutes the false assumption at the heart of this post. It is called Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.. Rome fell whilst under a single state religion; Christianity.

Whilst Constantine temporarily unified the Empire, this sowed the seeds of its destruction.
The fact is that throughout the entire history of Rome the empire thrived on the internecine struggles, which kept the soldiers trained, fit and battle ready and the leaders keen and responsive to an ever changing situation.
Rome had always had a "plethora of religious and racial differences', as that was exactly what had glued the empire together from the time of Julius Caesar right through to Julian. It was the control and tolerance of religious pluralism that bound the political structure together.
A "house divided" was always more strong that when it was brought together under the tyranny of the Cross

With Christianity came compulsion, oppression, decay and disintegration.

A moment's thought about Rome's Golden period should inform you that you are simply wring here as the very thing you assert was the cause of Rome's greatness was the converse of the situation in which Rome has its major successes.

Quite a strange one in the sense that the head of the church, the Queen, if not a Queen, would not be allowed by that misogynous church to be it's head.

Was it just last year that they finally allowed female Bishops?

Regards
DL

Yeah but no one really cares.

[Hobbes' Choice]

We've already got a state religion in our nation thanks.

And thankfully that means we are far less religious than the idiots across the pond.

[Greatest I am]

[

Quite a strange one in the sense that the head of the church, the Queen, if not a Queen, would not be allowed by that misogynous church to be it's head.

Was it just last year that they finally allowed female Bishops?

Regards
DL

Yeah but no one really cares.[/quote]

Except for half of the world population of women.

"Whilst Constantine temporarily unified the Empire, this sowed the seeds of its destruction."

It lived for another 100 years after suffering about 7 major wars against the other barbarian hoards.

A house divided against itself would not have lasted as long. Rome's ideology did not die. It move to Washington.

The U. S. has been fracturing more yearly and if you look at the various legislation and other forces and ideas that binds a country together and make it strong, you will note that the United States is more of an Un-United states.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

We've already got a state religion in our nation thanks.

And thankfully that means we are far less religious than the idiots across the pond.

Not all of us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYV7KWQ-fY4

Regards
DL

[Hobbes' Choice]

[

Quite a strange one in the sense that the head of the church, the Queen, if not a Queen, would not be allowed by that misogynous church to be it's head.

Was it just last year that they finally allowed female Bishops?

Regards
DL

Yeah but no one really cares.

Except for half of the world population of women.

Bollocks. 99.5% of the world's women have never even heard of the church of England. Most Brits probably don't even know

"Whilst Constantine temporarily unified the Empire, this sowed the seeds of its destruction."

It lived for another 100 years after suffering about 7 major wars against the other barbarian hoards.

Your idiotic suggestion was that monotheism was linked to Rome's strength, when it is obvious that its strongest period was during the days of (later called) Paganism, in which Rome continued to grow in size and power. The unification under Xity was the point of change from active subjugation of barbarians, to weak defence against them, from an idea of Rome as a growing power to one that became sundered in half and eventually withered step by step.
Julian was the last Pagan emperor and only 40 years after his death Rome withdrew from Britain. Despite attempts at reforms by Julian, the damaging christianising reforms of Constantine has already weakened the empire and subsequent wet-minded Christians emperors lacked the balls and necessary aggression of the Pagan ideology to defend the empire.





A house divided against itself would not have lasted as long. Rome's ideology did not die. It move to Washington.

You are talking nonsense. Rome thrived on religious toleration throughout its hey day. Are you stupid?
Washington represents the secular state not bound by religion. you are talking bollocks. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another .

The U. S. has been fracturing more yearly and if you look at the various legislation and other forces and ideas that binds a country together and make it strong, you will note that the United States is more of an Un-United states.

Regards
DL[/quote]

Gibberish, ignoring the facts of history
You might want to consider getting your history facts from something other than the back of a cereals packet.

[Arising_uk]

...

Bollocks. 99.5% of the world's women have never even heard of the church of England. Most Brits probably don't even know...

[Greatest I am]

[

Quite a strange one in the sense that the head of the church, the Queen, if not a Queen, would not be allowed by that misogynous church to be it's head.

Was it just last year that they finally allowed female Bishops?

Regards
DL

Yeah but no one really cares.

Except for half of the world population of women.

Bollocks. 99.5% of the world's women have never even heard of the church of England. Most Brits probably don't even know

"Whilst Constantine temporarily unified the Empire, this sowed the seeds of its destruction."

It lived for another 100 years after suffering about 7 major wars against the other barbarian hoards.

Your idiotic suggestion was that monotheism was linked to Rome's strength, when it is obvious that its strongest period was during the days of (later called) Paganism, in which Rome continued to grow in size and power. The unification under Xity was the point of change from active subjugation of barbarians, to weak defence against them, from an idea of Rome as a growing power to one that became sundered in half and eventually withered step by step.
Julian was the last Pagan emperor and only 40 years after his death Rome withdrew from Britain. Despite attempts at reforms by Julian, the damaging christianising reforms of Constantine has already weakened the empire and subsequent wet-minded Christians emperors lacked the balls and necessary aggression of the Pagan ideology to defend the empire.





A house divided against itself would not have lasted as long. Rome's ideology did not die. It move to Washington.

You are talking nonsense. Rome thrived on religious toleration throughout its hey day. Are you stupid?
Washington represents the secular state not bound by religion. you are talking bollocks. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another .

The U. S. has been fracturing more yearly and if you look at the various legislation and other forces and ideas that binds a country together and make it strong, you will note that the United States is more of an Un-United states.

Regards
DL

Gibberish, ignoring the facts of history
You might want to consider getting your history facts from something other than the back of a cereals packet.[/quote]

You should do something about your Tourette syndrome.

Regards
DL

[Gustav Bjornstrand]

In your OP you point to real issues and problems and ask very good questions.

When I read your post I felt that what you described was essentially the root of an enormous problem that is not at all easy to visualise or express.

Essentially, you are asking how it might be possible for a people --- Europe --- to discover a guiding metaphysical idea and ideal. Yet you are also aware that Europe is in a state of falling away from any such guiding ideal. I think it is fair to say, and it is known to theorists, sociologists and philosophers, that Europe is in a fracturing state. This does not mean in every sense --- indeed the opposite might be true --- but in a *spiritual* sense.

You, like many, [seem to] feel the loss of a link to a guiding ideal and a clear metaphysic, and struggle to define what such an ideal might be or how it might be recovered.

To insure the survival of the Western ideology, in these times of religious strife and division, should the present Western political powers follow Constantine’s example and choose a State Religion?

I am not suggesting that we send out this new religion to convert by the sword the way Christianity did. I think that we are intelligent enough today to debate the morality of the various religions to determine which is the most moral and the best for nations and the individuals within them.

Is creating a State Religion the way to peace?

I would say that the problem is much larger than simple choosing to install a religion, even if that were practicable, and it is not. The issue is that we have lost the conceptual link, and also the sentimental link (a link that we feel to be real), to an Ideal that we can articulate. Once upon a time it might have been --- indeed for 1000 years in Europe it was --- an idea about *God*. But I think we would have to say that any such idea is in a state of fracturation.

I don't think that a religion, defined as what one feels one is related to at a most basic and fundamental level, is something that can be 'reasoned back into existence'. It is either there or it isn't.

Also, I am not sure that a Western ideology is a *definite thing* that can be named or revealed. Our ideas are comprised of many many different ideologies. In this sense then our present ideology is simply a fractured ideology! (I mean this in the sense of a whole mass of different ideologies non-unified).

[Hobbes' Choice]

You should do something about your Tourette syndrome.

Regards
DL

I'll that that as you conceding to my greater knowledge of history.
I think we've had this out before; your crazy USA is Rome nonsense.
History is more complex and never repeats itself.

[Greatest I am]

In your OP you point to real issues and problems and ask very good questions.

Thanks.

When I read your post I felt that what you described was essentially the root of an enormous problem that is not at all easy to visualise or express.

True but if I make it too long or complicated it would not get read by most.

Essentially, you are asking how it might be possible for a people --- Europe --- to discover a guiding metaphysical idea and ideal. Yet you are also aware that Europe is in a state of falling away from any such guiding ideal.

I do not think the state should have much to say about metaphysical issues as those are as unknowable to them as they are to religions. I see the state as having good enough judgement to judge the moral tenets of religions only.

I think it is fair to say, and it is known to theorists, sociologists and philosophers, that Europe is in a fracturing state. This does not mean in every sense --- indeed the opposite might be true --- but in a *spiritual* sense.

Agreed but I would say that all the Western nations are fracturing including the U.S. and eventually Canada.

You, like many, [seem to] feel the loss of a link to a guiding ideal and a clear metaphysic, and struggle to define what such an ideal might be or how it might be recovered.

Not quite. I see the guiding ideals of secular laws as quite good as compared to the mainstream religions that preach homophobia and misogyny and would like to bring the stoning of gays and fornicators to the West. Just to name a couple of mainstream religions more barbaric tenets.

To insure the survival of the Western ideology, in these times of religious strife and division, should the present Western political powers follow Constantine’s example and choose a State Religion?

I am not suggesting that we send out this new religion to convert by the sword the way Christianity did. I think that we are intelligent enough today to debate the morality of the various religions to determine which is the most moral and the best for nations and the individuals within them.

Is creating a State Religion the way to peace?

I would say that the problem is much larger than simple choosing to install a religion, even if that were practicable, and it is not. The issue is that we have lost the conceptual link, and also the sentimental link (a link that we feel to be real), to an Ideal that we can articulate. Once upon a time it might have been --- indeed for 1000 years in Europe it was --- an idea about *God*. But I think we would have to say that any such idea is in a state of fracturation.

Secular law has already shown that it holds better ideals that the mainstream religions and I see naming and choosing the religion with the best ideology so that at the very least, the general public can know which ones are faily good and which are the worst in the eyes of those who lead us.

I don't think that a religion, defined as what one feels one is related to at a most basic and fundamental level, is something that can be 'reasoned back into existence'. It is either there or it isn't.

If their moral tenets are found lacking, and they choose to not reform then they should be outlawed the way some countries are now doing with Islam.

Also, I am not sure that a Western ideology is a *definite thing* that can be named or revealed. Our ideas are comprised of many many different ideologies. In this sense then our present ideology is simply a fractured ideology! (I mean this in the sense of a whole mass of different ideologies non-unified).

True that all Western states have some differences in thought but they all promote freedom of speech while now Western Ideologies would not allow it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... TdKxCz2FIQ

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

You should do something about your Tourette syndrome.

Regards
DL

I'll that that as you conceding to my greater knowledge of history.
I think we've had this out before; your crazy USA is Rome nonsense.
History is more complex and never repeats itself.

Yet Washington used to be called Rome.

Regards
DL

[Hobbes' Choice]

Is creating a State Religion the way to peace?

It clear is his opinion but it there is plenty of historical examples where this is a silly thing to say.

From the early medieval period All Europe was untied under Christianity and there was not a single day of peace until 1918.
Secularism has shown some promising trends, but noting to write home about. And where the system has mirrored an overarching state religious system such as co-called Soviet Russia under Stalin the results have been internal peace but external war, exported to promote the quasi-religion of the Comintern.

A state religion demands obedience, that is where the problem starts. Without a reasonable opposition, any system demanding obedience, turns to tyranny. Secular democracy is the least worst system so far.
A state religion can only work such as in the UK where the power of the church is completely subordinated by the democratic process.

[Greatest I am]

Is creating a State Religion the way to peace?

It clear is his opinion but it there is plenty of historical examples where this is a silly thing to say.

From the early medieval period All Europe was untied under Christianity and there was not a single day of peace until 1918.
Secularism has shown some promising trends, but noting to write home about. And where the system has mirrored an overarching state religious system such as co-called Soviet Russia under Stalin the results have been internal peace but external war, exported to promote the quasi-religion of the Comintern.

A state religion demands obedience, that is where the problem starts. Without a reasonable opposition, any system demanding obedience, turns to tyranny. Secular democracy is the least worst system so far.
A state religion can only work such as in the UK where the power of the church is completely subordinated by the democratic process.

Which is basically what I propose.

I never proposed a theocracy, only that Western democracies rid themselves of the most immoral creeds the way some are doing by outlawing Islam.

Regards
DL